Free Expression under Attack: Azerbaijan`s Deteriorating Media

Transcrição

Free Expression under Attack: Azerbaijan’s
Deteriorating Media Environment
Report of the International Freedom of Expression Mission to
Azerbaijan
7-9 September 2010
October 2010
ARTICLE 19
Free Word Centre
60 Farringdon Road
London
EC1R 3GA
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7324 2500
Fax: +44 20 7490 0566
E-mail: [email protected]
© ARTICLE 19, London, 2010
ISBN: 978-1-906586-21-8
This work is provided under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-ShareAlike
2.5 license.
You are free to copy, distribute and display this work and to make derivative works,
provided you:
1) give credit to ARTICLE 19;
2) do not use this work for commercial purposes;
3) distribute any works derived from this publication under a license identical to this one.
To access the full legal text of this licence, please visit:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/legalcode.
ARTICLE 19 would appreciate receiving a copy of any materials in which information from
this report is used.
This report is published thanks to generous support from Open Society Institute Assistance Foundation/Azerbaijan, which also provided support for the coordination of the
mission.
List of endorsing organizations
This report was written and endorsed by (in alphabetical order):
ARTICLE 19: Global Campaign for Free Expression
Free Word Centre
60 Farringdon Road
London EC1R
United Kingdom
Contact: Rebecca Vincent
Azerbaijan Advocacy Assistant
Tel: +44 (0) 207324 2500
www.article19.org
Freedom House
1301 Connecticut Avenue NW
Floor 6
Washington D.C. 20036
USA
Contact: Courtney C. Radsch
Senior Program Officer
Tel: +1 202 296 5101
www.freedomhouse.org
Index on Censorship
Free Word Centre
60 Farringdon Road
London EC1R 3GA
United Kingdom
Contact: Natasha Schmidt
Assistant Editor
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7324 2527
www.indexoncensorship.org
International Federation of Journalists
International Press Center
Residence Palace
Block C
Rue de la Loi 155
1040 Brussels
Belgium
Contact: Adrien Collin
Project Officer
Tel: +32 2 235 22 03
www.ifj.org
Media Diversity Institute
43-51 Great Titchfield Street
London W1W 7DA
United Kingdom
Contact: Milica Pesic
Executive Director
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7255 2473
http://www.media-diversity.org
Open Society Foundations
Media Program
Contact: Stewart Chisholm
Senior Program Manager
Tel: +44 (0) 207 031 0200
www.soros.org/initiatives/media
Press Now
Witte Kruslaan 55
1217 AM Hilversum
Postbank 7676
The Netherlands
Contact: Ruken Baris
Program Coordinator
Tel: +31 35 62 54 300
www.pressnow.nl
Reporters Without Borders
47 rue Vivienne
75002 Paris
France
Contact: Lucie Morillon
Head of the New Media Desk
Tel: +33 1 44 83 84 84
www.rsf.org
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers
7 Rue Geoffroy Saint Hilaire
75005 Paris
France
Contact: Rodrigo Bonilla
Coordinator
Tel: +33 1 47 42 85 28
www.wan-ifra.org
Acknowledgments
This report is a joint publication of the member organizations of the International
Partnership Group for Azerbaijan, which took part in a freedom of expression mission to
Azerbaijan from 7 to 9 September 2010. Participating organizations included ARTICLE 19;
Freedom House; Index on Censorship; International Federation of Journalists; Media
Diversity Institute; Press Now; Open Society Foundations; Reporters Without Borders; and
World Association of Newspapers and News Publishers.
The report was compiled by Rebecca Vincent, Azerbaijan Advocacy Assistant of ARTICLE
19, with contributions from (in alphabetic order): Ruken Baris, Program Coordinator of
Press Now; Rodrigo Bonilla, Coordinator of the World Association of Newspapers and News
Publishers; Adrien Collin, Project Officer of the International Federation of Journalists;
Lucie Morillon, Head of the New Media Desk of Reporters Without Borders; Milica Pesic,
Executive Director of the Media Diversity Institute; Courtney C. Radsch, Senior Program
Officer of Freedom House; and Natasha Schmidt, Assistant Editor of Index on Censorship.
The report was edited by JUDr. Barbora Bukovskà, Senior Director for Law and
Programmes of ARTICLE 19 and Natasha Schmidt, Assistant Editor of Index on Censorship.
Gunay Rahimova translated the report from English into Azerbaijani and a summary of the
report from English into Russian.
The other mission participants included Dr. Agnès Callamard, Executive Director of
ARTICLE 19, who led the mission; Stewart Chisholm, Senior Program Manager of the Open
Society Foundations Media Program; Edward Pittman, Program Coordinator of the Open
Society Foundations Media Program; and Mona Samari, Senior Press Officer of ARTICLE 19,
all of whom provided valuable input for the report.
Special thanks are due to Rovshan Bagirov, Director of the Freedom of Expression/Media
Program and Public Relations Director of the Open Society Institute — Assistance
Foundation/Azerbaijan, who provided local expertise for the report and logistical
assistance to the mission.
The mission is grateful to the journalists and other media workers, civil society activists,
and government officials with whom it met in Baku. The information given during these
meetings
was
essential
to
the
development
of
this
report.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary......................................................................................2
Recommendations.......................................................................................3
1. Introduction...........................................................................................5
2. Impunity for violence against journalists.........................................................6
3. Legal restrictions on freedom of expression....................................................12
4. Defamation...........................................................................................14
5. State influence on the media......................................................................16
6. Other constraints on independent media........................................................18
7. A mistrusting, controlled and divided media environment...................................19
8. Ethics, professionalism and self-regulation in the print media..............................21
9. Freedom of expression online.....................................................................23
10. Freedom of expression and elections...........................................................27
11. Conclusion...........................................................................................29
Appendix A - List of meeting participants..........................................................30
1 Executive Summary
From 7 to 9 September 2010, nine international non-governmental organizations
conducted a joint freedom of expression mission to Azerbaijan to underscore their serious
concerns regarding the current freedom of expression situation in the country. The mission
met with journalists and other media workers, civil society activists and government
officials, and participated in a local civil society freedom of expression forum. This report
provides an overview of the mission's findings and concerns regarding the freedom of
expression situation in Azerbaijan.
The mission found that freedom of expression in Azerbaijan has sharply deteriorated over
the past several years due to a number of worrisome trends. The mission was particularly
concerned by the Azerbaijani authorities' continuing practice of imprisoning journalists
and bloggers in connection with expressing critical opinions; the enduring cycle of acts of
violence against journalists and impunity for those who commit these acts; and the
continued existence of criminal defamation provisions in Azerbaijani law.
This report also includes a series of recommendations developed by the mission for
concrete measures which the Azerbaijani government must implement in order to address
the serious freedom of expression situation in the country. These recommendations
include immediately and unconditionally releasing the currently imprisoned journalists and
bloggers and ceasing the imprisonment of persons for exercising their right to freedom of
expression; undertaking thorough, prompt and independent investigations into all
instances of violence against journalists and prosecuting those responsible for these acts;
and decriminalizing defamation and ensuring that civil defamation provisions comply with
international standards.
In perpetuating current practices, the Azerbaijani authorities are failing to comply with
their international commitments to promote and protect freedom of expression. This
trend is of particular concern in the context of Azerbaijan's upcoming parliamentary
elections in November 2010, as freedom of expression is a necessary precondition to the
fair and free conduct of elections. The mission intends for this report to encourage the
Azerbaijani authorities to implement the necessary freedom of expression reforms and to
ensure their full compliance with Azerbaijan's international commitments in that regard.
The mission further intends for this report to serve as a catalyst for greater international
attention to the freedom of expression situation in Azerbaijan. The mission notes in
particular the important role played by those governments with political and economic
ties to Azerbaijan, and calls upon them to hold the Azerbaijani authorities accountable for
their freedom of expression record.
2 Recommendations
The mission calls on the Azerbaijani authorities to:
1. Order the immediate and unconditional release of imprisoned journalist Eynulla
Fatullayev and imprisoned bloggers Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli;
2. Ensure that no journalists, media workers, bloggers or other citizens are arrested for
exercising their right to free expression;
3. Initiate thorough, prompt and independent investigations into all instances of violence
and threats of violence against journalists, political activists and human rights defenders,
and bring those responsible to justice;
4. Ensure that all trials of journalists, political activists and human rights defenders are
carried out in accordance with international standards for due process and the
presumption of innocence;
5. Decriminalize defamation and ensure that all civil defamation provisions are in line with
international standards;
6. Implement more effectively the Law on the Right to Obtain Information passed in 2005;
in particular, take steps to appoint an information ombudsman as required by this law;
7. Establish fair, equitable and transparent conditions for the allocation of state
advertising;
8. Establish an independent, multi-stakeholder committee with transparent procedures
for the allocation of state media-support funds;
9. Establish an independent broadcasting regulatory body in line with international
standards and with transparent procedures for the allocation of licenses;
10. Allow for the functioning of truly independent self-regulatory bodies for print media;
11. Reverse the ban prohibiting foreign entities from broadcasting on national frequencies,
including BBC, Voice of America, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty;
12. Promote the development of public service broadcasting that is in the interest of the
public and is independent of government interests, with particular attention paid to the
regions outside of Baku;
13. Invest in Internet infrastructure and work towards universal, affordable, high-speed
Internet access countrywide;
14. Preserve and protect freedom of expression online and avoid imposing unnecessary
regulation; and
15. Implement media provisions in the Election Code by:
● establishing systematic monitoring to ensure equal and equitable access to
state media by all candidates;
3 ●
●
ensuring that journalists have access to polling stations as election observers,
including throughout the vote-tabulation process; and
taking prompt and effective action against violations.
Furthermore, the international mission calls for an extensive, inclusive, multi-stakeholder
consultation to support the implementation of a voluntary code of ethics and rigorous
professional standards for journalists.
Finally, we call on the international community, particularly those countries with
economic and political ties to Azerbaijan, to hold the government accountable for its
freedom of expression record.
4 1.
Introduction
This report is the result of a joint freedom of expression mission to Azerbaijan conducted
by nine international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from 7 to 9 September 2010.
Participating organizations included ARTICLE 19; Freedom House; Index on Censorship;
International Federation of Journalists; Media Diversity Institute; Press Now; Open Society
Foundations; Reporters Without Borders; and World Association of Newspapers and News
Publishers.
These organizations are members of the International Partnership Group for Azerbaijan,
and are active in working towards the promotion and protection of freedom of expression
in the country. They agreed to undertake the mission in light of their serious concerns
regarding the freedom of expression situation in Azerbaijan. The timing of the mission was
based on the participating organizations’ concerns regarding the freedom of expression
climate in the run-up to Azerbaijan's November 2010 parliamentary elections.
During the mission, participants met with journalists and other media workers, civil
society activists, and government officials. A full list of meeting participants is provided in
Appendix A. The mission attended a preliminary session of imprisoned journalist Eynulla
Fatullayev's appellate hearing in the case of his conviction of drug possession. The mission
also participated in a local civil society forum on freedom of expression.
The mission regretted the unavailability of Ali Hasanov, head of the Political and Social
Department of the Presidential Administration, who initially had agreed to meet with the
mission but was unavailable at the last minute. The mission also regretted the refusal of
the Ministry of Justice to grant permission for mission participants to meet with
imprisoned journalist Eynulla Fatullayev.
The main objective of the mission was to improve the freedom of expression situation in
Azerbaijan. The specific objectives were to demonstrate international support to those
working on-ground towards the promotion and protection of freedom of expression in
Azerbaijan; to increase international attention to the freedom of expression situation in
the country; and to increase pressure on the Azerbaijani authorities to take immediate,
concrete steps to improve the freedom of expression situation in the country.
Structure of the Report
The Executive Summary and recommendations developed by the mission precede this
introduction. Following this introduction, Chapter 2 provides an overview of the cycle of
violence against journalists and impunity for those who commit these acts. Chapter 3
outlines the Azerbaijani authorities' use of the law to restrict freedom of expression, and
Chapter 4 examines the continued use of criminal defamation provisions in the country.
Chapter 5 provides an overview of the influence of the state on Azerbaijani media, and
Chapter 6 outlines the economic constraints faced by the media. Chapter 7 explores the
division present among the media in Azerbaijan, and Chapter 8 looks at issues related to
professionalism of journalists. Chapter 9 examines the situation of freedom of expression
online. Chapter 10 reviews freedom of expression in the context of elections. Chapter 11
contains the mission's concluding observations, with a list of meeting participants
following in Appendix A.
5 2. Impunity for Violence against Journalists
In Azerbaijan, those who attack or harass journalists do so in the knowledge that they will
not be punished for their crimes. The fact that the authorities have failed to conduct
effective investigations into these crimes has contributed significantly to the current
climate of fear and vulnerability. This endemic impunity has resulted in an environment in
which citizens feel they do not have access to independent and unbiased media and do not
enjoy the full rights of a functioning democracy, which has broader implications for
Azerbaijan's democratic development. A free press is the first witness of human rights
violations; it can expose corruption and help with conflict management in order to foster
economic and political development.
Elmar Huseynov: a symbol of the current danger and a sign of what is to come?
The murder of journalist Elmar Huseynov in 2005 is symbolic of both the cycle of violence
and the broader decline in free expression in Azerbaijan. Huseynov, the editor-in-chief of
the opposition weekly Monitor, was shot dead on 2 March after he and other members of
his staff had been continuously harassed by the authorities. Members of the independent
media claimed the authorities were behind the murder, and Huseynov’s father was of the
same opinion. In contrast, the authorities accused two Georgian nationals of committing
the crime and demanded their extradition. The Georgian authorities refused, and there
have been no visible attempts by the Azerbaijani authorities to investigate further.
As a result of the authorities’ failure to bring Huseynov’s murderers to justice, many
journalists believe that criminals are free to harass and target independent reporting
within the country.1 In June 2010, the Representative for Freedom of the Media of the
Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Dunja Mijatovic, placed
Azerbaijan on her “Hall of Shame” list for its failure to bring Huseynov’s murderers to
justice.2
“The level of impunity is extraordinary and breeds violence,” commented one journalist
who spoke to the mission. Other interviewees agreed that the current situation makes it
easy for those wanting to silence critical voices, creating “an army of criminals” with a
“free pass” to continue their abuses, as one journalist put it. The threat against
journalists is so acute that many said they feared another murder was likely.
Parallels have been drawn — by journalists within Azerbaijan and by members of the
international community — between the murder of Elmar Huseynov and that of Georgiy
Gongadze, publisher of the Internet journal Ukrainska Pravda in Ukraine, who was
abducted and murdered in September 2000. Gongadze is a symbol for impunity in Ukraine,
just as Huseynov has become for Azerbaijan.
Continuing violence against journalists
The persistent targeting of selected individuals in the years following Huseynov’s murder
has perpetuated and strengthened the cycle of impunity in Azerbaijan. In 2009, the
Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety reported over 50 instances of “attacks,
provocation, violations and threats against journalists and media organizations” in
1
2
http://en.rsf.org/azerbaijan-on-visit-to-france-aliev-reminded-30-05-2006,17849.html
http://www.osce.org/documents/rfm/2010/06/44433_en.pdf 6 Azerbaijan, many of them instances of violence.3 Authorities remain indifferent to the
plight of journalists and police fail to protect them; when journalists report violence or
threats of violence against them, they are often ignored, and, in some cases, subjected to
acts of retaliation for lodging complaints with the authorities. In July 2009, bloggers Emin
Milli and Adnan Hajizade reported an attack against them to the police, and were
themselves arrested for hooliganism. They were sentenced to two years and two and a
half years in prison respectively.
There have been many acts of violence against journalists during the last five years,
including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Rasul Shukursoy, a reporter of Komanda newspaper, who was stabbed on 30 August
2010. He had received threats prior to his attack, but no action was taken to
protect him.4
Elmin Badalov, a reporter of Yeni Musavat newspaper, who was attacked on 28 July
2010 by security guards while taking photographs of villas near Baku reportedly
owned by oligarchs. When he complained to the police, they refused to open an
investigation and tried to present the case as if he had fallen and injured himself.5
Emin Huseynov, the head of the Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety, who
was attacked in a Baku police station on 14 June 2008.6
Agil Khalil, a reporter of Azadliq newspaper, who was assaulted on 22 February
2008 and stabbed on 13 March 2008.7
Uzeyir Jafarov, a former editor of Gundelik Azerbaijan newspaper, who was
attacked on 24 April 2007.8
Bahaddin Khaziyev, the editor-in-chief of Bizim Yol newspaper, who was brutally
attacked on 18 May 2006.9
Fikret Huseynli, a reporter of Azadliq newspaper, who was kidnapped and tortured
in Baku on 5 March 2006.10
In July 2009, the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Committee noted concern regarding
reports of killings and attacks against journalists, and called on the authorities to protect
media workers from such acts of violence and to “pay special attention and react
vigorously if such acts occur.”11 Council of Europe (COE) High Commissioner for Human
Rights Thomas Hammarberg also expressed grave concern regarding reports of violence
and threats of violence against journalists and called on the authorities to conduct
“effective and independent” investigations into reports of such violence or threats.12
The situation in the regions: a bleak picture
In the regions outside of the capital, the situation for journalists is even direr. They face
violence and threats regularly and most instances go unreported. The situation is
particularly serious in the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhchivan, and the range of subjects
perceived as off-limits to journalists makes it an even riskier profession than in Baku. For
3
http://www.ifex.org/azerbaijan/2010/04/01/2009-freedom-of-speech-annual-report.pdf
http://www.ifex.org/azerbaijan/2010/09/01/shukursoy_stabbed/
5
http://en.rsf.org/azerbaijan-security-guards-who-attacked-25-08-2010,38208.html
6
http://en.rsf.org/azerbaijan-press-freedom-activist-20-06-2008,27569.html
7
http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1079639.html
8
http://ifex.org/azerbaijan/2007/04/24/editor_of_critical_newspaper_brutally/
9
http://en.rsf.org/azerbaijan-opposition-demonstrators-arrested-12-06-2006,17759.html
10
http://en.rsf.org/azerbaijan-opposition-journalist-escapes-06-03-2006,16672.html
11
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/hrcs96.htm
12
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1642017 4
7 example, local journalists Malahat Nasibova and Ilgar Nasibov face constant pressure from
the authorities. Over the past several years, they have been sued many times, and in
December 2007, Ilgar Nasibov was arrested and detained for several months.
“There are no journalists left in the regions,” said several reporters. According to one
journalist, even employees of the mainstream television stations cannot ensure coverage
of certain topics in the regions, including business, meaning that information on these
subjects often do not make it back to the newsrooms for distribution.
Corruption within the electoral system is also said to be rife. One journalist reported that,
in the 2009 municipal elections, one of his colleagues discovered that votes had been cast
using the identities of deceased persons. He said that officials had threatened to report
him to the National Security Ministry unless he gave them a bribe of two sheep.
No steps taken to remedy the situation
Under European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) jurisprudence, states party to the
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) are obligated to conduct thorough, prompt,
and independent investigations by law enforcement authorities into cases of human rights
violations. However, the Azerbaijani authorities have consistently failed to adequately
investigate cases of violence and threats of violence against journalists, which constitute
violations of Articles 2 and 3 of the ECHR.
There is no tangible evidence that the law enforcement agencies have taken any
significant steps to provide protection to journalists or investigate threats and acts of
violence against them. Such cases have rarely, if ever, been investigated. When acts of
violence or threats have been investigated, the processes have been lengthy and the
findings unsatisfactory. Journalists have been told there are no updates when they have
enquired about the progress of their cases, even when they have supplied information
about the identities of potential suspects.
One example of such an investigation is that into the case of Agil Khalil, which has raised
significant concerns within the domestic and international legal communities; it is widely
documented that the investigation in the case has suffered from a number of
shortcomings. Khalil was the victim of two attacks — including a knife attack — as well as
other attempted attacks, yet the authorities failed to provide him with adequate
protection. Khalil was also attacked while he was in police custody. Instead of pursuing
possible links to his work, the investigation continued to focus on his personal life,
attempting to discredit him using smear campaign tactics.
Government officials are intolerant of criticism against them. It is felt among journalists
that authorities — from the highest level of the state to local officials — are either
unwilling to tackle the issue of violence and impunity, or are directly responsible for it.
The ECtHR ruled on 22 April 2010 that Eynulla Fatullayev should be released
immediately13, but he remains in prison. In December 2009, authorities presented him
with an additional charge of drug possession, which former Representative on Freedom of
the Media of the OSCE Miklos Haraszti called “highly improbable” and “aimed at preempting” the ECtHR’s ruling in Fatullayev’s case.14 Fatullayev’s continued detention sends
13
Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, 22 April 2010, Application no. 40984/07:
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&action=html&highlight=fatullay
ev&sessionid=60202769&skin=hudoc-en
14
http://www.osce.org/fom/item_1_42272.html
8 a clear message to other journalists, particularly those who have been critical of the
authorities, that open, independent reporting will be punished.
Additionally to criminal proceedings, individuals can file complains regarding violations of
their rights with the Human Rights Commissioner (Ombudsperson) of Azerbaijan under the
2001 Constitutional Law on the Commissioner for Human Rights of Republic of
Azerbaijan.15 Although staff from the Office of the Human Rights Commissioner insisted
that they investigate any cases of violations against journalists reported to them,
testimonies from journalists who have been attacked assert the opposite. The
Commissioner’s staff emphasized that the office maintains friendly relations with
journalists, pointing out that that since the Commissioner has taken office, she has issued
2,200 press releases in response to human rights abuses. They also assert that the office
was responsible for the authorities’ decision to permit imprisoned blogger Emin Milli to
leave prison to attend his father’s funeral.
Moreover, all investigations by the Office of the Human Rights Commissioner into
violations against journalists are unsatisfactory, as the Commissioner can only make
recommendations to the authorities concerning the case. There is no guarantee - or
probability - that these recommendations will be implemented by the authorities.
According to her office, the Commissioner cannot interfere in the judicial process. This
amounts to recognition, at least in part, that the Human Rights Commissioner’s hands are
tied.
Impunity’s impact on the profession — and society
One editor who spoke with the mission reported that he had lost track of the number of
times he had been threatened or attacked. Another journalist said “the life of every
citizen or journalist who wants freedom is under constant threat,” demonstrating that the
culture of impunity affects not only the media community, but also society at large.
There is a widespread lack of faith in the country’s legal system, both in terms of the
judiciary and the legal profession. Some journalists feel that lawyers will not represent
them in cases related to their professional activities because of the inherent dangers.
Despite the significant risks attached with taking on such cases, lawyers from
organizations such as the Media Rights Institute and the Azerbaijan Lawyers’ Forum, along
with some independent lawyers, continue to provide legal assistance to some journalists.
As one such lawyer noted in a discussion with the mission, the number of lawyers willing
to take on such cases has decreased significantly in recent years.
Journalists and the media organizations they work for are not familiar with basic security
measures, such as fitting media outlets’ premises with alarms and closed-circuit cameras,
or even varying the routes used to travel to work to make surveillance of a targeted
journalist more difficult. The suspicion that authorities either simply ignore requests for
attacks and threats to be investigated – or that this refusal is a direct attempt to silence
critical voices – has led to a sense of fatalism and disenchantment within civil society.
Support for independent media in Azerbaijan is a vital part of protecting the country’s
journalists. As the number of independent media outlets shrinks, so do the benefits gained
from a thriving professional environment that offers solidarity and therefore a degree of
15
See the Constitutional Law on the Human Rights Commissioner (Ombudsman) of the Republic of
Azerbaijan. Adopted 28 December 2001; available at www.transparency.az/transpfiles/n5.doc. The
first Commissioner, who was elected on 2 July 2002, remains in office.
9 protection. This does not bode well for the future. Independent or opposition newspapers
such as Azadliq report that applications for internships have dwindled. “The younger
generation doesn’t want to write about politics; it’s too dangerous,” said one journalist.
Self-censorship
The culture of impunity in Azerbaijan has led to a climate of pervasive self-censorship,
and journalists attest to this. Unable to report the political and social situation
accurately, journalists often avoid particular subjects. Journalists and bloggers who spoke
with the mission noted that, for example, reporting on the president or his family or any
of their business dealings is considered off-limits, as is criticism of government officials or
debate about religion. But it is becoming increasingly difficult to identify dangerous
subjects; because it has become evident that those who commit acts of violence against
reporters, editors and columnists go unpunished, a journalist working in almost any field,
writing about any topic, may find him or herself vulnerable to attack.
International image and its impact on the country
The many instances of freedom of expression violations, and the failure by the authorities
to take adequate steps to address these violations, demonstrate the Azerbaijani
government’s lack of seriousness about its freedom of expression obligations. Azerbaijan
has failed to live up to its international commitments to respect and protect freedom of
expression per its membership in organizations such as the UN, the COE, and the OSCE,
and its ratification of major human rights treaties. Instead, it joins a group of
authoritarian regimes which are notorious for their disregard of international human rights
standards and law.
The actions taken by the Azerbaijani authorities to restrict freedom of expression have
significantly damaged Azerbaijan’s international reputation, placing it firmly in the camp
of “worst offenders.” Like Russia, Azerbaijan ignores many of its international
commitments to respect and protect the rights of its citizens. Like China and Iran,
Azerbaijan jails bloggers and online journalists.16 Elmar Huseynov, like Georgiy Gongadze
from Ukraine, was killed for exposing corruption and government abuses.17 Freedom House
ranks Azerbaijan as a “not free” country in terms of press freedom, along with countries
such as Belarus, Burma (Myanmar), and North Korea.18 Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev
appears in Reporters Without Borders’ list of “predators of press freedom.”19
More than 40 cases of freedom of expression violations are currently pending consideration
by the ECtHR, including the cases of Eynulla Fatullayev, Agil Khalil, Uzeyir Jafarov, and
Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli. But there is concern and frustration that the international
community is unable or unwilling to bring about change because of its strategic political
and economic ties with Azerbaijan. The government’s decision to refer the case of Eynulla
Fatullayev to the ECtHR's Grand Chamber, and its refusal to honor the ECtHR's decision,
demonstrates its disregard for international standards.
It is clear that the situation of freedom of expression in Azerbaijan will not improve until
the cycle of impunity is broken. The current media landscape in the country is bleak and
16
17
18
19
http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-barometer-netizens-imprisoned.html?annee=2010
http://en.rsf.org/ukraine-dead-official-gets-sole-blame-for-16-09-2010,38378.html
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=251&year=2010
http://en.rsf.org/spip.php?page=predateur&id_article=37258 10 journalists live in a climate of fear. As one reporter said, journalists find themselves in
“the worst scenario.”
3. Legal restrictions on freedom of expression
11 A wide range of legal provisions have been abused by the Azerbaijani authorities to
restrict freedom of expression. Some of these – such as defamation provisions - are quite
clearly connected with individuals exercising their right to freedom of expression. A trend
has emerged, however, of the use of other charges less obviously connected with freedom
of expression to silence critical voices. Currently imprisoned bloggers and journalists
Eynulla Fatullayev, Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli are examples of such cases. Fatullayev
was most recently convicted for drug possession, while Hajizade and Milli are serving
sentences for hooliganism; both sets of charges have been criticized as politically
motivated.20
For example, as mentioned above, former OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media
Miklos Haraszti called the charge of drug possession against Fatullayev “highly
improbable,” and COE High Commissioner for Human Rights Thomas Hammarberg stated
that criminal charges appeared to have been used to “silence undesired voices” in
Hajizade and Milli’s case.21 Hammarberg called on the authorities to “end such practices
of unjustified or selective criminal prosecution and imprisonment of journalists” and to
“immediately release all journalists and any other persons imprisoned because of views or
opinions expressed.” He specifically called for the release of Eynulla Fatullayev, Adnan
Hajizade and Emin Milli.22
Fatullayev's case has become particularly serious. His lawyer, Isakhan Ashurov, reported
that a total of 22 cases on a variety of charges have been filed against Fatullayev,
including those which have landed him in prison. The Azerbaijani authorities are refusing
to comply with the 22 April 2010 ECtHR ruling in Fatullayev's case, which found that his
imprisonment on charges of defamation, supporting terrorism, inciting hatred, and tax
evasion constituted a violation of his freedom of expression.23 The ECtHR ordered the
Azerbaijani authorities to immediately release Fatullayev from prison. Instead of releasing
him, the authorities proceeded with new charges against him of drug possession, for which
he was convicted on 6 July 2010. The Azerbaijani authorities then applied to the ECtHR's
Grand Chamber in Fatullayev's ECtHR case, which rejected the appeal, making the 22 April
2010 ruling final.
Hajizade and Milli are well known for their activities as youth activists and video bloggers,
engaged in civic rather than political activism. They were arrested and charged with
hooliganism after appealing to police as victims of an assault, following an incident in a
restaurant during which two men demanded that Hajizade and Milli stop discussing the
activities of their youth movement and then attacked them.24 The youths’ arrest occurred
shortly after Hajizade appeared in a satirical online video which was critical of the
government's high expenditure to import two donkeys from Germany.25
20
http://en.rsf.org/azerbaidjan-imprisoned-journalist-will-not-be-21-07-2010,37887.html and
http://www.article19.org/pdfs/press/azerbaijan-eynulla-fatullayev-sentenced-to-2.5-yearsimprisonment-on-new-pol.pdf.
21
http://www.osce.org/fom/item_1_42272.html and
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1642017.
22
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1642017
23
Fatullayev v. Azerbaijan, 22 April 2010, Application no. 40984/07:
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?item=1&portal=hbkm&action=html&highlight=fatullay
ev&sessionid=60202769&skin=hudoc-en
24
http://www.article19.org/pdfs/publications/living-as-dissidents-freedom-of-expression-inazerbaijan.pdf
25
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aaecvg7xCIk
12 Other examples of abuse of the law to restrict freedom of expression include the case of
Azadliq newspaper editor-in-chief Ganimat Zahid, who served a prison sentence following
his arrest in November 2007 on charges of hooliganism and inflicting minor bodily harm
following an apparent set-up. A woman whom Zahid had passed on the street accused
Zahid of insulting her, and a man claiming to defend her engaged in a scuffle with Zahid.
As the editor-in-chief of one of the most highly circulated opposition newspapers, Zahid is
well known for his critical views of the Azerbaijani government.26 As with Hajizade and
Milli’s case, COE High Commissioner for Human Rights Thomas Hammarberg stated that in
Zahid’s case, the law appeared to have been used to silence a critical voice.27
Sanat newspaper columnist Rafig Tagi served a prison sentence following his conviction in
May 2007 on charges of inciting religious hatred, based on an article he had written
arguing that Islamic values were preventing Azerbaijan's integration into European
structures and stunting Azerbaijan's democratic progress.28 Both Zahid and Tagi maintain
that they were targeted for their journalistic activities.
In addition, a number of obstacles continue to prevent full implementation of the 2005
Law on the Right to Obtain Information. Most notable is the government's failure, five
years after the adoption of the law, to have appointed an Information Ombudsman as
required by the law. This position would serve as an important channel of recourse for
citizens in cases of non-compliance with the law outside of the court system, which is
particularly important considering the lack of independence in the judiciary. Another
significant barrier is the failure by some public bodies to comply with their responsibilities
as information-owners under the law.29 These issues must be addressed to achieve broader
realization of freedom of expression in Azerbaijan.
4.
Defamation
26
27
28
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100548.htm
29
http://www.article19.org/pdfs/publications/azerbaijan-freedom-of-information-report.pdf
13 The continued presence of defamation provisions in Azerbaijan's Criminal Code remains
among the most serious legal barriers to freedom of expression in the country.30 Criminal
defamation laws have a serious chilling effect on freedom of expression. They leave
journalists in a position of vulnerability, and their existence contributes to self-censorship.
In July 2009, following its review of Azerbaijan’s implementation of its International
Convention on Civil and Political Rights commitments, the UN Human Rights Committee
called for the Azerbaijani government to bring its defamation laws into compliance with
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.31 In March 2010, COE High
Commissioner for Human Rights Thomas Hammarberg noted that the decriminalization of
defamation in Azerbaijan should be considered as "a matter of urgency.”32
The mission was concerned by the Azerbaijani government’s response to Hammarberg’s
report with regards to criminal defamation. The government stated that because the level
of professionalism of journalists in Azerbaijan remained low, decriminalizing defamation
would “exacerbate the situation” rather than improve it. The government also claimed
that the use of criminal defamation provisions had become “an exception rather than a
practice.” The mission notes that issues regarding the professionalism of journalists do not
merit the retention of criminal defamation provisions and should not be used as an excuse
for such. The mission further notes that an increase in practices of self-censorship has
contributed to the reduction in the use of criminal defamation provisions. In this regard,
this reduction cannot be considered as progress.
While it is true that criminal defamation provisions no longer lead to prison sentences as
frequently as in some previous years, they are still frequently used. Public officials often
initiate these lawsuits, demonstrating intolerance to criticism. The Media Rights Institute
reported that as of June, in 2010 public officials had filed 26 criminal defamation lawsuits
against media outlets, which resulted in 14 convictions.33
Civil defamation provisions also present an obstacle to freedom of expression in
Azerbaijan, as they both fail to meet international standards and are used excessively
against many opposition and independent media outlets. Many of these cases also are filed
by public officials or by persons acting in the interest of public officials. The heavy
damages awarded in these lawsuits present serious problems for many media outlets,
which already face difficult financial situations due to a number of economic constraints
on the media. The Media Rights Institute reported that as of June, in 2010 there had been
36 civil defamation lawsuits filed against media outlets, 30 of which were satisfied by the
court.34
The mission was encouraged by the indication by several Members of Parliament that the
Human Rights Commission of the Azerbaijani Parliament, the Milli Mejlis, was considering
a draft law which would decriminalize defamation. While decriminalization of defamation
would certainly be a step in the right direction, the mission notes the importance of
ensuring that any new civil defamation provisions comply with international standards for
free expression.
30
31
32
33
34
http://www.article19.org/pdfs/tools/defamation-abc.pdf
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/co/CCPR.C.AZE.CO.3.doc
http://www.mediarights.az/docs/half_year_report_2010_Azerbaijan_MRI.pdf
http://www.mediarights.az/docs/half_year_report_2010_Azerbaijan_MRI.pdf
14 Further, the mission notes the need to bring existing civil defamation provisions into
compliance with international standards, as some aspects of these provisions remain
problematic. In particular, provisions in the Constitution and the Civil Code which
guarantee legal protection for the honor and dignity of the president do not comply with
international standards, which hold that public figures should be subject to greater
criticism than private persons.35
5.
State
influence
on
the
35
http://www.article19.org/pdfs/analysis/azerbaijan-defamation-2004.pdf
15 media
State influence and dominance of the broadcast media stifles diversity, creating a media
landscape in which pluralism has no place. The number of independent media outlets has
decreased significantly since the November 2005 parliamentary elections.
Almost all broadcast media in Azerbaijan follow a pro-government line in their news
coverage. The National Television and Radio Council (NTRC) is comprised of members
appointed by the president. It has been criticized for a lack of transparency in its
decisions to issue or suspend broadcast licenses. One of the most popular television
stations in the country, ANS TV, had its license temporarily suspended by the NTRC in
2006. Monitors have reported that ever since, the outlet has adopted a much more
cautious stance in its news coverage.36
On 1 January 2009, the government banned the use of domestic airwaves for foreign
broadcasts and prohibited the local-language broadcasts of various international news
media from accessing national television and radio frequencies.37 This affected the BBC,
Voice of America, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, which previously broadcast on
national radio frequencies but are now available only online in Azerbaijan.38 This move
served to further restrict the population’s access to independent and critical news
coverage.
The influence of the state has also been detrimental to the print media. Unbiased print
media is rare, as most newspapers are either connected with ruling party officials or
members of the political opposition. Approximately eighty percent of circulated
newspaper media is owned by the state, ten percent is run by political opposition parties,
and only the remaining five to ten percent can be considered politically independent.39
Newspaper circulation remains alarmingly low. According to several prominent editors,
circulation has decreased dramatically compared to the first years following independence
from the Soviet Union. In 1992 and 1993, circulation of many newspapers was estimated to
be between 150,000 and 200,000. Today, newspapers rarely surpass a circulation of 5,000
to 6,000.
State control of printing and distribution facilities has resulted in a particularly difficult
situation for the print media. There is one main distribution center in Azerbaijan and
newspapers and journals are sold in few places (one kiosk per 10,000 persons).
Government organizations, schools, hospitals and universities are obliged to subscribe to
state-run newspapers.
State intervention in the media in Azerbaijan’s regions is also strong. According to local
journalists who spoke with representatives of the mission, under a new informal policy for
regional outlets initiated in 2009, the government has provided technical and financial
assistance to some regional television stations, and sent some pro-government media
personnel as reinforcements. Moreover, new regional television stations continue to be
established with government support, leading to a large segment of available frequencies
being taken by potentially pro-government broadcasters. The journalists who spoke with
representatives of the mission believe that the government’s intention with this policy is
not to strengthen regional media, but, on the contrary, to prevent the emergence of
independent regional broadcasters and thereby hinder the dissemination of critical
36
37
http://www.rferl.org/Content/Azerbaijan_Bans_RFERL_Other_Foreign_Radio/1364986.html
38
http://www.irex.org/system/files/EE_MSI_2010_Azerbaijan.pdf
39
16 opinions. They view the fact that the regional broadcasters that receive government aid
have become increasingly inclined to provide entertainment coverage as a consequence of
this new policy.
The side-effect of this policy is that some regional televisions stations are over-equipped
and under-staffed. Thanks to the government aid, the technical capacity of some regional
television stations is superior to that of some prominent broadcasters in Baku. However,
the level of professionalism and the salaries of journalists working for these regional
broadcasters does not match this technical capacity, resulting in a lack of professional
staff able to use the sophisticated equipment.
The situation is similarly dire for the print media. Most regional and local newspapers are
funded by city or district-level administration officials.
6. Other constraints on independent media
17 Many opposition and independent newspapers are in a particularly difficult financial
situation, and face problems in paying salaries, taxes and periodic court fines.
The authorities engage in a number of other indirect interventions which make the
existence of independent and opposition media difficult. The main problem is selective
advertisement. The government reportedly actively pressures companies not to place their
ads in critical newspapers and advertisers subsequently fear retaliation for possible
association with these outlets.
The state financially supports media outlets through the Media Support Foundation,
established by presidential decree in 2009. It claims to work for a more autonomous,
diversified and stronger media. According to a representative of the foundation, Mushviq
Alasgarli, over the past year, the fund has supported 30 newspapers, including three
opposition newspapers. However, it is widely viewed by representatives of critical media
outlets and civil society organizations as a means by the government to influence media
and favor moderate reporting.
Another controversial measure criticized for the same reasons is the recent presidential
decree which allocated five million AZN (approximately 4.48 million Euros) for the
construction of apartments for journalists.40 According to some editors, certain journalists
have been provided with housing through these funds. One editor emphasized that this
support has had very little impact on his newspaper. He estimated that at most, the
assistance he receives from these funds covers the running costs of the newspaper for one
month and a half per year. He noted that a grant of 10,000 AZN for a media organization
represented a “drop in the ocean,” particularly when compared to the enormous profits
the country is making from its natural energy resources.41 Other editors critical of the fund
viewed their acceptance of the funds as justified by the fact that they paid their taxes to
the state. However, they emphasized that often pro-government media do not pay taxes
and receive the funding nonetheless. The most critical voices called these methods an
institutionalized form of “bribery”.
Issues with the professionalism of journalists are also closely linked with the potential
improvement of the financial situation for independent and opposition media. These issues
will be elaborated upon in Chapter 8.
7. A mistrusting, controlled and divided media environment
40
41
See Chapter 8: Code of Ethics, professionalism and self-regulation in the print media
18 Twenty years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Azerbaijani media community is
still struggling to achieve international standards for freedom of expression, access to
information, and fair working conditions.
Unions
The country counts a number of official and non-official trade unions. The Journalists’
Trade Union (125 members) and the First Trade Union of Public Television and Radio
Broadcasting Company of Azerbaijan (800 members) are registered officially as trade
unions which campaign for the labor and professional interests of their members. The
Azerbaijan Journalists’ Union (4,000 members) and Yeni Nesil Journalists’ Union (550
members) are professional associations which focus on freedom of expression and the
professional rights of journalists, but not on broader labor or social rights.
Journalism education
While a number of local organizations provide training in journalism in Azerbaijan, their
overall impact is hindered by a lack of cooperation between the different educational
institutions for the benefit of journalists. Journalism curricula at academic institutions
lack practice-based courses and modules, and journalism training centers lack the proper
structure and long-term strategic approach necessary to meet their students’ training
needs. Among those organizations are the public Baku State University, the private Khazar
University, the Baku School of Journalism and the Azerbaijan Media Center.
NGOs
The NGO community is also very active in Azerbaijan. The Media Rights Institute, the
Institute for Reporters’ Freedom and Safety, and the Journalists’ Democratic League are
among the most active of the NGOs working on freedom of expression issues. They focus
on monitoring freedom of expression violations, providing legal defense and pursuing cases
of strategic litigation, pursuing legislative reforms, and acting as watchdog organizations,
drawing national and international attention to freedom of expression violations in the
country.
Traditional media
A large number of media outlets currently operate in Azerbaijan, not all with the same
degree of success and influence. There are currently 162 newspapers published in
Azerbaijan. Of these, 32 are daily, 45 are weekly, and 85 are monthly publications.42 The
best-selling daily is the daily opposition Yeni Musavat newspaper, with a reported
circulation of 12,000. The other popular daily opposition newspaper, Azadliq, has a
reported circulation of 7,500. The ruling party's official organ, Yeni Azerbaijan newspaper,
and Parliament’s organ, Azerbaijan, claim print runs of 6,000 and 8,700 respectively. The
Russian-language newspapers Zerkalo and Ekho are also among the most widely read in
Azerbaijan, with reported circulations of 5,000 and 6,000 respectively. Broadcasters
include ANS-TV, ITV, Azad Azerbaijan TV (ATV), Lider TV, Khazar TV, and Space TV. News
agencies include Trend, Azeri Press Agency (APA), and Turan.
The mission noted a marked division within the traditional media community, as conveyed
by many interlocutors in mission meetings. Members of the sector do not enjoy the level
42
19 of solidarity found in a healthy and functioning media environment. These divisions were
observed throughout the media sector, including between the capital and the regions, and
have led to significant vacuums in the media environment, specifically regarding the
continuing development of professional standards, self-regulation and protection among
the media community.
There seems to be little dialogue between pro-government and opposition media, and
they express very different perspectives on the current situation and specific events,
resulting in the impression that they live in separate worlds. These extreme divisions
prevent the media community from seeking common values around which to define their
work. Overt political influences on the media have created a lack of professional solidarity
among journalists which must be overcome for successful development of the media.
These divisions also undermine the capacity of unions to recruit and organize effectively
and to speak with one voice on behalf of all journalists. Journalists’ unions and other
professional groups must support their colleagues and provide collective protection for the
space in which value-based journalism can take place. In doing so, they will provide the
necessary framework for solidarity in the media community with a social philosophy of
ethical conduct.
Rivalries and a dramatic drop in the number and variety of media outlets have radically
altered the ways in which journalists work. The political influences that underpin
censorship and media interference have increased, contributing to further polarization of
the media-development community.
Building common grounds
The lack of common ground between these journalists and groups needs to be bridged if a
genuinely professional media community is ever to develop.
The relationship between the media-focused NGOs and the representative journalists’
unions and associations is often strained as they compete for the attention to be
authoritative voices on media issues. While their mandates and audiences often differ,
there should be greater efforts to combine the strengths of different organizations to
defend the common goals of independent professional journalism.
The mission found that the links between journalists and civil society organizations,
human rights defenders, trade unions, women’s groups, and representatives of minority
communities should be strengthened to win broad public support for greater respect for
the profession and the rights of journalists. Unfortunately, in Azerbaijan, there are
currently many fractures preventing effective solidarity action.
Even when there is a dialogue between media community and civil society, the dialogue is
not based on a clear understanding that in a democratic society, journalism should
maintain focus on its most crucial value: independence.
8. Ethics, professionalism and self-regulation in the print media
20 Many of the mission’s interlocutors raised the issue of professionalism in the Azerbaijani
media. They considered the issue of ethical standards to be a serious problem in the
profession, along with poor working conditions due to issues with contracts, irregular
salaries, and illegal undeclared payments. They also noted a clear link between progress
in professionalism and the revision of legal provisions for defamation.
Journalists do not enjoy the freedom to exercise responsibility. The level of political and
managerial influence and interference has contributed to the further deterioration of the
quality of journalism and has seriously affected the security of journalists.
Journalists and editors are too close to their political sponsors, whether they be
government or political parties. Many do not consider that, regardless of the media outlet
for which they work, they face similar forms of constraints in their journalistic activities.
This needs to be acknowledged as much by opposition media as by pro-government media.
More importantly, it is essential that the professional journalist is seen as an independent,
objective reporter of the truth, not as someone attached to a particular political interest.
The introduction of editorial independence and promotion of professional standards in the
media would foster public engagement in political debate and society as a whole. It would
strengthen the democratic processes of the country and provide the public and
government officials with the information necessary to conduct an informed public debate
on relevant policies.
In addition to the intense level of political interference in the daily work of journalists,
the appalling conditions in which journalists are forced to work are the primary cause of
poor ethical standards. It is not possible to expect journalists to perform professionally
and ethically while they operate with irregular and illegal contracts, low and uncertain
salaries, and without employment stability. When journalists can be hired and fired at
will, they are not in the position to demand respect for their professional independence
from their employers.
The mission’s attention was brought to another issue important to the strengthening of
independent journalism: the presidential decree which allocated five million AZN
(approximately 4.48 million Euros) for the construction of apartments for journalists.43
This contradicts the new Code of Ethics, which states that journalists may not receive any
personal, political or financial remunerations, valuable presents, or free services which
could hamper their ability to provide the community with accurate information.
If journalists agree with the provision by the state of such funds, the mission notes that it
is essential to establish an independent, multi-stakeholder committee with transparent
procedures for the allocation of state media-support funds in order to avoid the misuse of
such funds, which would further corrupt the media. One of the basic criteria for the
committee responsible for allocating these funds should be the print media’s
implementation of the Code of Ethics. The committee should also monitor the
implementation of the Code providing regular reports on violations.
The mission met with many experts who agreed that it is only through industry-driven
initiatives that engage all sides of the media that the necessary media reform and
development of professional journalism will take place.
43
http://en.trend.az/news/society/media/1746769.html
21 On the eve of the mission, on 6 September 2010, an amended version of the Code of Ethics
for Azerbaijani Journalists was launched at a joint conference by the OSCE Office in Baku
and the Azerbaijan Press Council. The event was attended by representatives of the
presidential administration, parliamentarians, and local and international experts.44 The
new document is based on the former Code of Ethics developed by the Azerbaijan Press
Council. It focuses on four principles: to serve the truth, accuracy and objectivity; to
approach information sources respectfully; to protect honor, dignity and personal
immunity; and to protect the reputations of journalists and their organizations.
While the mission notes that it is a positive step for local actors to engage in dialogue on
the issue of professionalism of journalists such as at the 6 September OSCE event, such
dialogue cannot in and of itself solve the many problems in Azerbaijan’s media
environment. The mission is concerned by the Azerbaijani government’s attempt to
deflect criticism of its repressive practices towards the media by placing the blame for the
dire state of freedom of expression in the country on journalists.45 It is evident that there
are problems with the professionalism of journalists in the country. However, many of the
more serious obstacles to freedom of expression are attributable directly to the
authorities, such as the imprisonment of journalists and the impunity for those who
commit acts of violence against journalists, as well as the economic environment in which
advertising is skewed towards pro-government outlets and salaries remain unsustainably
low.
It is then urgent to form a cross-industry working group which will be charged with media
reforms in the country. The working group should involve all sectors of the industry: the
employers, editors, journalists, their unions, media NGOs and the Press Council. This body
should set out the strategy for long-term media reform including guidelines on editorial
independence and editorial statutes, self-regulatory instruments, pluralist and structured
media ownership, as well as working conditions in line with international standards. This
strategy should be developed in consideration of the broader freedom of expression
environment in the country.
9. Freedom of expression online The deep pessimism within the media community is somewhat counter-balanced by the
energy and enthusiasm prevailing among bloggers and others writing for online media.
44
45
http://www.osce.org/documents/html/pdftohtml/45921-2.pdf.html
https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1642017 22 A dynamic blogosphere
There was variation among the figures provided to the mission by its interlocutors.
According to official figures, one third of the population (2.5 million persons) has access to
the Internet. According to the head of the Internet Forum, Osman Gunduz, a more
realistic figure is 27 percent of the population, about 90 percent of which have dial-up
access only. The digital divide is wide between rural and urban parts of the population, as
Azerbaijan’s regions remain poorly connected.
The blogosphere has dramatically expanded during the past three years. Ten thousand
bloggers are reported to be active, although it seems that closer to several hundred are
influential in the Azerbaijani blogosphere.
A bloggers’ forum, Bloqosfer 2010, was held after the mission was completed, from 10 to
12 September 2010. It was seen as the crowning of the development of the Azerbaijani
blogosphere over the past three years, or as a new beginning.46 According to Elnur
Kelbizadeh, it was attended by about 50 bloggers and served as an opportunity for
bloggers, new media specialists and other Internet experts, as well as representatives
from the industry and civil society to identify as a community and strengthen their links.
Representatives of the authorities attended the event. Some bloggers complained that the
case of the two imprisoned bloggers was not raised during the forum, but others explained
that the social aspect of blogging was stressed over political issues.
Vibrant online media
There was encouraging evidence of a vibrant and growing online media, including Internet
television stations such as Obyektiv TV, ANTV, and Kanal 13. Those using digital media to
report, campaign and inform displayed an optimism which bodes well for the future.
Young people have taken the potential of Web 2.0 by storm. Some of the most popular
websites, such as Tac.az, have started to address issues relevant to Azerbaijan’s youth.
Havaodsutorpag.com, open.az, contact.az, and irfs.az also have an interesting audience.
Facebook has now about 170,000 users in the country, most of whom are 18 to 30 years
old. Twitter is less popular, even though the “Green Revolution” in Iran contributed to
making it more known in Azerbaijan, according to bloggers who met with the mission.
When the traditional media are under the control of the government or face pressure
from the authorities, online media has been filling the void and has been able to ensure
interesting coverage of current events.
During the State Oil Academy shootings in 2009, the new media’s reaction outpaced the
traditional media’s. Videos of the event were posted immediately after the shootings
occurred and news updates were regularly provided. This served as a turning point for the
online media and bloggers, and as an opportunity to show their contribution to the right to
information.
At its 8 September launch, the Azerbaijan Frontline Club screened a video that was filmed
in May 2010 for a project by the Turan information agency and Obyektiv TV. It showed the
devastation in several central regions (Sabirabad, Imishli, and Kurdemir) following the
flooding of the Kur River. The video showed corruption among authorities meant to
46
http://elnurkelbizadeh.azeriblog.com/2010/09/15/bloqosfer-2010-azerbaycana-ne-verdi
23 provide assistance to those affected by the floods. Local officials were accused of
retaining most or part of the money given by the state for recovery efforts.
It remains to be seen how much the new media will be able to cover sensitive stories and
help push the limits of censorship, or to help bring about benefits for the rest of the
media and society.
The Internet has also been a tool for mobilization in the country, whether used by the
opposition to voice criticism that rarely make it to the airwaves or to denounce corruption
and abuses. For example, a lorry driver was beaten by employees of the Ministry of
Transportation. A passer-by filmed it and posted it on YouTube. Many print outlets then
published stories about it. Many video petitions also circulate online to call for the release
of Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli.
Some dialogue has been taking place online between bloggers from Azerbaijan, Armenia
and Georgia. According to one blogger who spoke at an international conference held in
Budapest from 20 to 22 September 2010, if something negative happened to bloggers in
Azerbaijan, neighboring countries such as Armenia and Georgia could follow suit.47
With the November 2010 parliamentary elections coming up, some Facebook groups and
pages have popped up, created by political figures such as political analyst and potential
candidate Ilgar Mammadov48 or Erkin Gedirli, a lawyer whose group has now more than 400
members.49 Given the lack of media pluralism and problems with access to the media by
members of the political opposition, online and social media could provide a new avenue
for the government's critics to express themselves.
Facebook could also play a watchdog role during the elections period. On 20 September
2010, a local assistance and consultancy center, For the Sake of Civil Society, launched a
Facebook page calling for volunteer observers for the day of the elections.50
Self-censorship
Despite the optimism conveyed by most bloggers met by the mission, self-censorship for
online content is also an issue. “It's in everyone's head. We think of the consequences,”
said one blogger commenting on Adnan Hajizade and Emin Milli's case. Taboo topics
reportedly include the first lady, criticism of the president, exposing high ranking officials’
corruption and abuses, and coverage of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that deviates from
the official angle.
New media versus traditional media
The place of bloggers and citizen journalists in Azerbaijan is not clear. The head of the
Presidential Administration’s Social and Political Department, Ali Hasanov, publically
stated that “bloggers are not journalists,” as a way to dismiss international criticism
calling for the release of the two jailed bloggers.
47
48
49
50
https://sites.google.com/a/pressatgoogle.com/internet-at-liberty-2010/
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=135421166488943
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=132385643466167&ref=ts
http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=159803137367707&index=1
24 Some bloggers with whom the mission met complained about not being recognized as
journalists and then not being able to enjoy the rights and social benefits given to
journalists. However, a requirement that bloggers register with the Ministry of Justice
would present a danger of creating one category of bloggers recognized by the authorities,
and another category of “illegal bloggers,” who would become more vulnerable to
repression.
Bloggers have indeed encountered problems in trying to access official information since
they are not considered to be journalists. But many independent and opposition journalists
also face this issue.
The head of the Internet Forum, Osman Gunduz, stressed the need for more training to
educate journalists and journalism’ students, as well as the broader population, about the
potential of the new media. Some training occurs in the regions, where editors are more
open to it, but in Baku, it is more difficult to get editors’ attention and to advocate for
more links between online and traditional media. One blogger said that some editors
prohibit journalists from traditional media from writing for online media.
Regarding the long-term development of the online media and their resources, one
blogger noted that advertising options online are extremely limited.
Expensive and poor-quality Internet: a tool for Baku and its elite only?
The expansion of the blogosphere and the online media is for now a phenomenon very
much limited to the capital and a few large cities, in part due to poor infrastructure and
the cost of Internet access in the country. In spite of its economic strength, the
government has failed to provide its citizens with affordable, high-speed Internet access.
Such a service now costs the equivalent of 30 Euros per month. Dial-up connection is less
expensive, but allows only for sending e-mails and browsing the web, not for uploading or
downloading videos. The vast majority of the population is not able to access the web, or
has service that is so slow it cannot enjoy the Web 2.0 potential. This may be the result of
a political will to limit the reach on the Internet and its potential to hold those in power
accountable.
There is one point of entry to the Internet which is controlled by the Ministry of
Telecommunications. Among the approximately 35 Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that
operate in the country, only two are directly controlled by the Ministry. The remaining
ISPs are private companies, but there are suspicions that they may be required to allow
Azerbaijan’s security services to have access to the network on request. Most of the
bloggers and online journalists met by the mission said they were not aware of current
filtering or large-scale monitoring by the authorities. However, instances of filtering have
been uncovered, such as the blocking of some critical sites like tinsohbety.com, a website
hosted in Germany which criticizes the government and publishes cartoons of the
president. The authorities occasionally block Chechen websites (such as kavkazcenter and
chechenpress) and websites of some opposition newspapers (such as Yeni Musavat,
Azadliq, and Bizim Yol).
There is a marked lack of transparency regarding the administration of the .az domain
name. Several bloggers complained about not being able to register their preferred
names. The private company Intrans has a monopoly on the registration of websites on the
.az domain, with no independent oversight of the process.
Future restrictions?
25 For now there is no specific legislation regulating the Internet despite recent and repeated
statements by the head of the NTRC, Nushirvan Maharramli, and officials from the Ministry
of Communication stressing the need to license Internet television. Several of the
mission’s interlocutors said that the authorities were examining potential ways to regulate
the Internet. The more popular the Internet becomes, the more the online media
community fears restrictions might be imposed. Given the current media landscape in
Azerbaijan, such a move could potentially constitute Internet censorship.
The way the Internet was built in Azerbaijan, with a single point of entry similar to Burma
or Iran, ensures that if the authorities decide to do so, they can easily monitor websites,
filter content, or tamper with bandwidth speed – if it is not already being done behind the
scenes.
10. Freedom of expression and elections
26 The trends outlined above have significant potential to negatively impact the upcoming
November 2010 parliamentary elections. In addition, the mission has a few specific
concerns related to the media and elections in Azerbaijan.
The report issued by the OSCE's Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights
(OSCE/ODIHR) on its election observation mission during Azerbaijan's November 2005
parliamentary elections found that the Central Election Commission (CEC) had applied an
overly strict interpretation of provisions of the Election Code pertaining to news coverage
of the election campaign period. The CEC considered any media coverage of candidates to
be campaigning on behalf of those candidates, meaning any coverage of the campaign
period was subject to legal provisions for equal coverage of all candidates. The report
noted that this did not stop the media from extensively covering the activities of public
officials, including the President.51
The OSCE/ODIHR recommended that the Azerbaijani authorities take a number of steps to
address media problems pertaining to elections. These included strengthening the
independence of public television; ensuring equitable news coverage of political parties
and candidates and taking prompt and effective action against violations; establishing
systematic media monitoring by the CEC; ensuring the independent appointment of
members of the National Television and Radio Council and impartial and transparent
mechanisms for the broadcast licensing process; and providing for the editorial
independence of the media, free of interference from the authorities, including by
investigating and prosecuting all instances of violence against journalists.
The mission raised many of these issues during a meeting with CEC officials. The head of
the CEC's Press Department, Azer Sariyev, noted that the Azerbaijani authorities have
enacted significant reforms to electoral legislation in cooperation with expert
international bodies such as the OSCE/ODIHR's Venice Commission. However, he noted,
implementing this legislation was difficult, with more than 30,000 persons taking part in
election commissions and 5,000 persons present at polling stations on Election Day.
According to Sariyev, the CEC was actively engaged in raising public awareness of Election
Code provisions and providing trainings for election officials.
The CEC officials expressed frustration in response to concerns raised by the mission,
OSCE/ODIHR, and other international experts and bodies regarding unbalanced news
coverage during election campaign periods. Sariyev said that during pre-election periods,
some candidates think that coverage of normal government activities is campaigning. The
head of the CEC’s International Relations Department, Rovzat Gasimov, asked, "Should we
stop covering the news just because there is an election"? CEC Press Department Advisor
Ramin Nuraliyev noted that in monitoring the media, the CEC had found that opposition
newspapers had often violated legal provisions related to election campaign periods. The
mission underscored the recommendation by the OSCE/ODHIR that the CEC should develop
systematic media monitoring, to which the CEC officials were receptive.
The mission raised the concern expressed by many local media, civil society, and political
activists regarding Parliament's decision in June 2010 to shorten the campaign period from
28 to 23 days.52 These activists feel that the shortened campaign period places
independent and opposition candidates in a disadvantaged position as they have less time
to get their message out to potential voters, as opposed to the ruling Yeni Azerbaijan
Party candidates who benefit from perpetual intensive media coverage of the president
51
52
http://www.osce.org/documents/odihr/2006/02/17923_en.pdf
http://www.rferl.org/content/Azerbaijani_Parliament_Amends_Election_Law/2076084.html
27 and other government officials. One Member of Parliament explained that the campaign
period had gradually decreased from 60 days to the current 23 days within a few years.
Sariyev noted that many European countries had short election periods and expressed his
belief that a shorter campaign period did not make the conduct of elections less
democratic. What was important, Sariyev said, was to comply with legal provisions for the
conduct of elections. Sariyev noted that if a candidate was unpopular, it would not matter
whether he or she campaigned for years, as they would not be elected.
One editor who spoke with the mission explained that many journalists face obstacles in
attempting to monitor the electoral process on Election Day. Although the Election Code
provides for journalists to observe all parts of the electoral process, he noted that in
practice, they are sometimes prevented from observing the vote tabulation process at the
end of the day. He further noted that sometimes other, non-media election observers
faced similar problems, and in some cases, even certain election officials were not
permitted to observe the vote tabulation process.
In response to the mission's noted concern of such practices, Gasimov said that the Central
Election Commission had never heard of any instance of a journalist being barred from a
polling station during the electoral process. According to Gasimov, there are procedures in
place for handling complaints of violations, and the Central Election Commission would
take immediate steps to address such complaints. Gasimov also noted that in some
instances, journalists present at polling stations were engaging in campaign activities or
intentionally agitating election officials. In such instances, Gasimov said that these
journalists were not behaving as election observers and should be removed from the
polling stations.
11. Conclusion
The mission found that the combined effect of the trends examined in this report is a
freedom of expression climate which has significantly deteriorated over the past several
28 years. The Azerbaijani authorities have failed to comply with many of their international
commitments to freedom of expression. Through actions such as their refusal to comply
with the European Court of Human Right’s ruling in Eynulla Fatullayev's case and the
unavailability of a top Presidential Administration official to engage in dialogue with the
mission, the authorities have demonstrated an unwillingness to seriously address the
freedom of expression problems in the country.
This state of affairs is particular disturbing in light of the upcoming parliamentary
elections in November 2010. There is currently very little space for public political debate
and many potential voters have been exposed to only one political view, that of the ruling
Yeni Azerbaijan Party. Without an environment conducive to political pluralism, elections
cannot be considered to be fair and free, regardless of any perceived progress in the
technical conduct of proceedings on Election Day.
The mission has developed a number of concrete recommendations to the Azerbaijani
authorities which must be implemented to improve the freedom of expression situation in
the country. These recommendations have been developed in accordance with the
Azerbaijani government's own commitments to freedom of expression under international
law. The full list of recommendations is available at the beginning of this report, but two
key steps which require immediate action are the unconditional release of Eynulla
Fatullayev, Adnan Hajizade, and Emin Milli; effective and independent investigations into
all cases of violence against journalists, as well as prosecution of those responsible for
their attacks; and decriminalization of defamation.
While the current poor freedom of expression climate is attributable largely to the actions
of the Azerbaijani authorities, the mission notes that the international community
maintains some responsibility in this regard. The mission urges those governments with
political and economic ties to Azerbaijan to consider their own commitments to human
rights and freedom of expression and to hold the Azerbaijani government to account in
this regard.
The mission hopes that this report will serve as a catalyst for the Azerbaijani authorities
to implement critical freedom of expression reforms and to the international community
to dedicate greater attention and resources to the freedom of expression situation in
Azerbaijan. The mission's participating organizations, along with other member
organizations of the International Partnership Group for Azerbaijan, will continue to
engage in dialogue with the Azerbaijani authorities and with local stakeholders to work
towards the full promotion and protection of freedom of expression in Azerbaijan.
Appendix A - List of meeting participants
Arzu Abdullayeva, Co-Chair of the Helsinki Citizen's Assembly and Chair of the Freedom of
Expression Committee
Elmira Akhundova, Member of Parliament
29 Mushviq Alasqarli, Chairman of the Journalists' Trade Union
Arif Aliyev, Chairman of the Yeni Nesil Journalists' Union
Intigam Aliyev, Chairman of the Azerbaijan Lawyers' Forum
Mehman Aliyev, Director of the Turan News Agency
Zardust Alizadeh, Director of the Baku School of Journalism
Iqbal Agazade, Chairman of the Umid Party and Member of Parliament
Rauf Arifoglu, Editor-in-chief of Yeni Musavat newspaper
Isakhan Ashurov, Human rights lawyer
Shahveled Chobanoglu, Yeni Musavat newspaper columnist
Dilara Efendieva, Head of the Peace and Security Center, Association for the Protection of
Women's Rights
Emin Fatullayev, father of imprisoned journalist Eynulla Fatullayev
Rovzat Gasimov, Head of the Central Election Commission's International Relations
Department
Fazail Gazanfaroglu, Chairman of the Great Creation Party and Member of Parliament
Osman Gunduz, Chairman of the Azerbaijan Internet Forum
Rashid Hajili, Director of the Media Rights Institute
Hikmet Hajizade, father of imprisoned blogger Adnan Hajizade
Bahaddin Haziyev, Bizim Yol newspaper editor-in-chief
Emin Huseynzade, New media specialist and Transitions Azerbaijan Country Director
Novella Jafaroglu, Chair of the Association for the Protection of Women's Rights
Uzeyir Jafarov, Milaz.info columnist and former Gundelik Azerbaijan newspaper editor
Yegana Jafarova, Human Rights Commissioner's Office
Seymur Khaziyev, Azadliq newspaper reporter
Vugar Maharramov, Head of Documentation Department, Human Rights Commissioner's
Office
Zemfira Maharramli, Chief of Office, Human Rights Commissioner's Office
Ilgar Mirza, Independent Internet professional
Fariz Namazli, Lawyer of the Media Rights Institute
Azer Nazarov, Blogger and new media expert
Ramin Nuraliyev, Press Department Advisor of the Central Election Commission
Anar Orujov, Director of the Caucasus Media Investigation Center
Elchin Sadikhov, Lawyer of the Media Rights Institute
Aydin Safikhanli, Human Rights Commissioner's Office
Azer Sariyev, Director of the Central Election Commission's Press Department
Elchin Shiklinski, Chairman of the Azerbaijan Journalists' Union and Editor-in-chief of
Zerkalo and Ayna newspapers
Rasul Shukurskoy, Komanda newspaper sports writer
Rafig Tagi, Sanat newspaper columnist
Ganimat Zahid, Editor-in-chief of Azadliq newspaper
30 

Free Expression under Attack: Azerbaijan`s Deteriorating Media

Transcrição

Documentos relacionados

Environmental Journalism In Brazil.

LESERSERVICE Die 10 wichtigsten Dos und Don`ts für perfekte

BWA Report on Religious Freedom Violations in Azerbaijan, 2013

Azercell – Azerbaijan – Feasibility Study

Reporters Without Borders

PDF

IAA Commercial Vehicles 2016: Sponsoring Packages

(Photo)Journalists Do What They Do - WJEC

nagorno-karabagh legal aspects - Deutsch

Summary of Azerbaijan History ( Reshid Guneyli)

Climate Journalists as Interpretive Community: Identifying

The Formal Political System in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. A